Literature DB >> 33958795

Artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiograms for identification of patients with low ejection fraction: a pragmatic, randomized clinical trial.

Xiaoxi Yao1,2, David R Rushlow3, Jonathan W Inselman4, Rozalina G McCoy4,5, Thomas D Thacher3, Emma M Behnken6, Matthew E Bernard3, Steven L Rosas7, Abdulla Akfaly8, Artika Misra9, Paul E Molling10, Joseph S Krien11, Randy M Foss12, Barbara A Barry4, Konstantinos C Siontis13, Suraj Kapa13, Patricia A Pellikka13, Francisco Lopez-Jimenez13, Zachi I Attia13, Nilay D Shah4, Paul A Friedman13, Peter A Noseworthy13.   

Abstract

We have conducted a pragmatic clinical trial aimed to assess whether an electrocardiogram (ECG)-based, artificial intelligence (AI)-powered clinical decision support tool enables early diagnosis of low ejection fraction (EF), a condition that is underdiagnosed but treatable. In this trial ( NCT04000087 ), 120 primary care teams from 45 clinics or hospitals were cluster-randomized to either the intervention arm (access to AI results; 181 clinicians) or the control arm (usual care; 177 clinicians). ECGs were obtained as part of routine care from a total of 22,641 adults (N = 11,573 intervention; N = 11,068 control) without prior heart failure. The primary outcome was a new diagnosis of low EF (≤50%) within 90 days of the ECG. The trial met the prespecified primary endpoint, demonstrating that the intervention increased the diagnosis of low EF in the overall cohort (1.6% in the control arm versus 2.1% in the intervention arm, odds ratio (OR) 1.32 (1.01-1.61), P = 0.007) and among those who were identified as having a high likelihood of low EF (that is, positive AI-ECG, 6% of the overall cohort) (14.5% in the control arm versus 19.5% in the intervention arm, OR 1.43 (1.08-1.91), P = 0.01). In the overall cohort, echocardiogram utilization was similar between the two arms (18.2% control versus 19.2% intervention, P = 0.17); for patients with positive AI-ECGs, more echocardiograms were obtained in the intervention compared to the control arm (38.1% control versus 49.6% intervention, P < 0.001). These results indicate that use of an AI algorithm based on ECGs can enable the early diagnosis of low EF in patients in the setting of routine primary care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33958795     DOI: 10.1038/s41591-021-01335-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Med        ISSN: 1078-8956            Impact factor:   53.440


  27 in total

1.  Current and future implications of the artificial intelligence electrocardiogram: the transformation of healthcare and attendant research opportunities.

Authors:  David M Harmon; Zachi I Attia; Paul A Friedman
Journal:  Cardiovasc Res       Date:  2022-02-21       Impact factor: 10.787

2.  Introducing Artificial Intelligence into the Preventive Medicine Visit.

Authors:  David M Harmon; Francisco Lopez-Jimenez; Paul A Friedman
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2022-08       Impact factor: 11.104

Review 3.  Year in Review 2021: Noteworthy Literature in Cardiothoracic Anesthesia.

Authors:  Aaron Smoroda; David Douin; Joseph Morabito; Matthew Lyman; Meghan Prin; Bryan Ahlgren; Andrew Young; Elijah Christensen; Benjamin A Abrams; Nathaen Weitzel; Nathan Clendenen
Journal:  Semin Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth       Date:  2022-05-17

4.  Artificial intelligence opportunities in cardio-oncology: Overview with spotlight on electrocardiography.

Authors:  Daniel Sierra-Lara Martinez; Peter A Noseworthy; Oguz Akbilgic; Joerg Herrmann; Kathryn J Ruddy; Abdulaziz Hamid; Ragasnehith Maddula; Ashima Singh; Robert Davis; Fatma Gunturkun; John L Jefferies; Sherry-Ann Brown
Journal:  Am Heart J Plus       Date:  2022-04-01

Review 5.  Artificial Intelligence in Cardiovascular Medicine: Current Insights and Future Prospects.

Authors:  Ikram U Haq; Karanjot Chhatwal; Krishna Sanaka; Bo Xu
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2022-07-12

6.  The promises and challenges of pragmatism: lesson from of a recent clinical trial.

Authors:  Xiaoxi Yao; Peter A Noseworthy
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2022-09

Review 7.  Cardiovascular Disease Screening in Women: Leveraging Artificial Intelligence and Digital Tools.

Authors:  Demilade A Adedinsewo; Amy W Pollak; Sabrina D Phillips; Taryn L Smith; Anna Svatikova; Sharonne N Hayes; Sharon L Mulvagh; Colleen Norris; Veronique L Roger; Peter A Noseworthy; Xiaoxi Yao; Rickey E Carter
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  2022-02-17       Impact factor: 23.213

8.  Assessing socioeconomic bias in machine learning algorithms in health care: a case study of the HOUSES index.

Authors:  Young J Juhn; Euijung Ryu; Chung-Il Wi; Katherine S King; Momin Malik; Santiago Romero-Brufau; Chunhua Weng; Sunghwan Sohn; Richard R Sharp; John D Halamka
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2022-06-14       Impact factor: 7.942

9.  Development and validation pathways of artificial intelligence tools evaluated in randomised clinical trials.

Authors:  George C M Siontis; Romy Sweda; Peter A Noseworthy; Paul A Friedman; Konstantinos C Siontis; Chirag J Patel
Journal:  BMJ Health Care Inform       Date:  2021-12

10.  Point-of-care screening for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction using artificial intelligence during ECG-enabled stethoscope examination in London, UK: a prospective, observational, multicentre study.

Authors:  Patrik Bachtiger; Camille F Petri; Francesca E Scott; Se Ri Park; Mihir A Kelshiker; Harpreet K Sahemey; Bianca Dumea; Regine Alquero; Pritpal S Padam; Isobel R Hatrick; Alfa Ali; Maria Ribeiro; Wing-See Cheung; Nina Bual; Bushra Rana; Matthew Shun-Shin; Daniel B Kramer; Alex Fragoyannis; Daniel Keene; Carla M Plymen; Nicholas S Peters
Journal:  Lancet Digit Health       Date:  2022-01-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.